I've ridden 250 two-strokes for over twenty years now, and I've always ridden two-strokes for the entire thirty years that I've been riding, other than the occassional little spin on someone else's bike. I'm starting to want more and more to replace my trusty old pal, my KDX 250. I've ridden plenty of XRs, and didn't really care for them, too overweight and underpowered for my tastes (yes, I know about the XR 650, but it would be a handful in the tight, nasty woods that I ride in, and it's really over weight) and I just don't care for their lazy, grunty power. I've rode a YZ 400 F a few times, and the power is much better than an XR, but it just felt so, well, alien after all these years of two-strokes. My experience in four-strokes is limited, but I am getting curious about owning one. How many of you guys were long-term two-strokers, and how long did it take you to get the "feel" for the four-stroke power? The one thing that really throws me off when I ride a four-stroke is the engine braking, it just totaly throws my timing off.
curious
- Thread starter spanky250
- Start date
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Hey,
My best friend always had 2-stroke MX bikes. When I got my XR400 this last summer, I let him take if for a spin. Within a month, he went and bought an XR400 for himself. He's small, 5'8" 150lbs., and struggled with the height and weight at first. He also struggled with the torque, comp. braking and difference in gearing ratios between the XR and his CR. After his third ride on the XR he did pretty good. The next ride he pulled out the CR. The CR has never been ridden since.
If you are good on bikes, like I know you are, you will warm to it quickly. After you learn not to try to fling, and flick you don't notice the weight as much. Throttle control is imperative to control the comp. braking, pulling in the clutch is an easy fix, until you learn when to let off the throttle and use the engine and the brakes together. You will learn in no time, have faith.
By the way, those blue things aren't "regular" thumpers. They are 2-stroke wanna-be's. So if you are going to get one of those, you'd be better to stick with your 2-stroke. Not really, well, yes really, I just bleed RED. Good luck.
My best friend always had 2-stroke MX bikes. When I got my XR400 this last summer, I let him take if for a spin. Within a month, he went and bought an XR400 for himself. He's small, 5'8" 150lbs., and struggled with the height and weight at first. He also struggled with the torque, comp. braking and difference in gearing ratios between the XR and his CR. After his third ride on the XR he did pretty good. The next ride he pulled out the CR. The CR has never been ridden since.
If you are good on bikes, like I know you are, you will warm to it quickly. After you learn not to try to fling, and flick you don't notice the weight as much. Throttle control is imperative to control the comp. braking, pulling in the clutch is an easy fix, until you learn when to let off the throttle and use the engine and the brakes together. You will learn in no time, have faith.
By the way, those blue things aren't "regular" thumpers. They are 2-stroke wanna-be's. So if you are going to get one of those, you'd be better to stick with your 2-stroke. Not really, well, yes really, I just bleed RED. Good luck.
My dad had ridden 2-strokes for over 30 years(seriously competitively way back when) when he switched from the CR5 to the Husaberg 501 FC. He never liked the 'berg and reverted to a 380 SX, of which he is now on his second one.
I had ridden two-strokes for about five years total when I switched to the 520 SX. I got used to the engine-braking in a few days and will probably never go back to a 2-stroke. I loved the 'berg also.
I had ridden two-strokes for about five years total when I switched to the 520 SX. I got used to the engine-braking in a few days and will probably never go back to a 2-stroke. I loved the 'berg also.
Spanky I was in a similar mind set. I began riding dirt bikes in
1969. I have always ridden two strokes (except for one 4 stroke yamaha
in the late 70s). Early this year I bought a KTM 400EXC because "fours
are in vogue." I didnt like it. I am not sure if it was because it
was a four stroke or because I couldnt get accustomed to the way the KTM
handled. Anyway I sold it and now am on a Gas Gas 300XC and I love it!
I just like the two stroke performance smoke and all!!
1969. I have always ridden two strokes (except for one 4 stroke yamaha
in the late 70s). Early this year I bought a KTM 400EXC because "fours
are in vogue." I didnt like it. I am not sure if it was because it
was a four stroke or because I couldnt get accustomed to the way the KTM
handled. Anyway I sold it and now am on a Gas Gas 300XC and I love it!
I just like the two stroke performance smoke and all!!
- Mar 9, 2001
- 3,180
- 0
Hey Spanky, same here, started riding in '68 always have had a 2 stroke, twice I added a small 200 and a 250 4 stroke to ride with the wife and kids but, still rode the 250 2 stroke the most. Recently I found the best( imo ) of both worlds and bought a 520 mxc, I don't think I will ever go back to the 2s or get away from the 520's
You might consider a 400 exc. for the woods
You might consider a 400 exc. for the woods
wfocrusty
Member
- Nov 2, 2001
- 118
- 0
Spank, I have to concur with JPIVEY. I also started riding in the late 60s (Yamaha Mini-enduro - remember them!) and have only owned one 4 stroker prior to this year. I bought a TT600 Yamaha from a buddy of mine and it was a TANK! These bikes I know were modified along with XR500s & 600s to race with 2 strokes of the day, but they just weren't competitive even with mega doses of money thrown into them. But, the engines were much more forgiving than the 2 strokes. Putting around at 8/10s was a blast...but, don't push it any further. I have been a long time KTM aficianado since the last days of the Penton, but I never would have believed that they could make a thumper feel and handle like a ring-ding. When I first threw a leg over a 400 SX a couple of years ago I was amazed at the similarity between it and my 300 MX/C. There was a bit of adjustment getting used to the additional engine braking, but this took all of 15 minutes. I was seriously in the market for a new KTM thumper!!!! And, being totally devoid of common sense, I decided that a 520 would be even more to love. When I finally got one (thanks Tim @ Funmart Cycles!) I couldn't comprehend the difference 120ccs would make. It is more beast than most humans need to wrestle with, but it is perfect for me. I had to adjust quickly to using the binders HARD, because this thing goes so much faster than you realize, I kept blowing right through corners. It took me a few rides to realize that I couldn't fight this thing...it'll win every time. I now have learned to be one with the machine! In snotty, nasty terrain it is so much easier to ride than my 300 it is almost like cheating. I can smoke most guys that are killing theirselves on two smokes without breaking a sweat. But, that is the secret. You have to let this bad boy do the work or it will beat you to death. The only thing I can tell you is beg, borrow, or steal a ride on any of the latest 4 stroke offerings and make up your own mind. There really is no way to loose!
Last edited:
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Hey,
I think you already know that you want a thumper. You just want 100 replies to convince you?
If you like the tight and nasty stuff, the smooth, "lazy", torquey power delivery will suit you well. Two strokes have the advantage in cornering, and instantaneous acceleration. But, when you learn to utilize the broad range of power, you will keep your speed and momentum up more, making acceleration less important. You will find that you will brake less, and that you can lug higher gears. You will be smooth. When you get smooth, you won't even notice the extra weight.
Cornering will be the trickiest until you really master the compression braking, and the tractable torque. When you get it down, the feeling is like watching an automotive road race. Smooth lines, braking, acceleration, always in control. It is also very cool though when you can powerslide/drift though a turn. Not like roasting your rear tire, just a smooth powerslide kinda like flat trackers. I still have not mastered the powerslide yet, but I'm working on it.
Heck, I have not even mentioned the sweet sound of thumpers. That low frequency sonic boom tends to grow on people. I think it's the same with Harley riders. There's just something pleasant and powerful about those compressed bursts of hot air "thumping" out it's mellow tune, then changing to an agressive roar as you push up the RPM's.
The other day I saw a chainsaw log cutting competition on ESPN. They were using these HUGE chainsaws with what had to be at least a 250cc 2-stroke motor, with the huge expansion chamber header and exhaust pipe. The buzzer would go off, they would reach down, start the saw, and then proceed to slice off three 18" diameter discs within seconds. These things were some of the most impressive displays of raw power I have ever seen. It totally blew my mind. So, I can definitely appreciate the very tangible benefits that 2-stroke motors offer. But, for my casual to mildly aggresive motorcycling needs, thumpers rule. Furthermore, as technology and materials get more sophisticated, and EPA standards get more strict, thumpers seem to definitely be destined to rule the world.
My fingers are tired, more to come when I get my next inspiration. :)
I think you already know that you want a thumper. You just want 100 replies to convince you?
If you like the tight and nasty stuff, the smooth, "lazy", torquey power delivery will suit you well. Two strokes have the advantage in cornering, and instantaneous acceleration. But, when you learn to utilize the broad range of power, you will keep your speed and momentum up more, making acceleration less important. You will find that you will brake less, and that you can lug higher gears. You will be smooth. When you get smooth, you won't even notice the extra weight.
Cornering will be the trickiest until you really master the compression braking, and the tractable torque. When you get it down, the feeling is like watching an automotive road race. Smooth lines, braking, acceleration, always in control. It is also very cool though when you can powerslide/drift though a turn. Not like roasting your rear tire, just a smooth powerslide kinda like flat trackers. I still have not mastered the powerslide yet, but I'm working on it.
Heck, I have not even mentioned the sweet sound of thumpers. That low frequency sonic boom tends to grow on people. I think it's the same with Harley riders. There's just something pleasant and powerful about those compressed bursts of hot air "thumping" out it's mellow tune, then changing to an agressive roar as you push up the RPM's.
The other day I saw a chainsaw log cutting competition on ESPN. They were using these HUGE chainsaws with what had to be at least a 250cc 2-stroke motor, with the huge expansion chamber header and exhaust pipe. The buzzer would go off, they would reach down, start the saw, and then proceed to slice off three 18" diameter discs within seconds. These things were some of the most impressive displays of raw power I have ever seen. It totally blew my mind. So, I can definitely appreciate the very tangible benefits that 2-stroke motors offer. But, for my casual to mildly aggresive motorcycling needs, thumpers rule. Furthermore, as technology and materials get more sophisticated, and EPA standards get more strict, thumpers seem to definitely be destined to rule the world.
My fingers are tired, more to come when I get my next inspiration. :)
- Thread starter
- #9
Impending EPA doom aside, I think the biggest reason I am considering a four-stroke (besides possible insanity, but that is a whole different topic ;) ) is because I am tired of frequent engine rebuilds, repairing expansion chambers, mixing gas, etc. etc.. I still love the instant, snappy response of two-strokes, and none of the four-strokes that I have ridden come close to delivering that. I am just afraid that I will plunk down a large chunk of money on a bike that I am then unhappy riding.
ochster
LIFETIME SPONSOR
- Mar 11, 2000
- 690
- 0
While the arguments and subjective comments about peformance and application will never end, I have a different view. I find it has been twice as much fun having one of each.
As a wrench, I would get bored simply working on one or the other, all of the time. Not to mention I find that usually one is apart, simply because I have another to ride.
It also keep your riding partners quessing on wich one you will show up with. I simply Love showing up on the air cooled 4-stroke, when everyone else is on thier smokers.
I find it also is a good way to introduce people to the sport. You need a back up bike to do that, and nothing wrong with it being a four stroke.
It's also a good deterent for the wife shopping habit's. She get's a new pair of shoes, I get a new Bike!
As a wrench, I would get bored simply working on one or the other, all of the time. Not to mention I find that usually one is apart, simply because I have another to ride.
It also keep your riding partners quessing on wich one you will show up with. I simply Love showing up on the air cooled 4-stroke, when everyone else is on thier smokers.
I find it also is a good way to introduce people to the sport. You need a back up bike to do that, and nothing wrong with it being a four stroke.
It's also a good deterent for the wife shopping habit's. She get's a new pair of shoes, I get a new Bike!
marcusgunby
LIFETIME SPONSOR
- Jan 9, 2000
- 6,450
- 2
Spanky i think the problem is your present mount is getting on abit like me;)
I firmly believe a modern 2 stoke KTM 250/300/380 is the least maintence required bikes made including 4 strokes.Think about it, change the gearbox oil every 2 rides (takes 5 mins)change the airfilter every ride (takes 3 minutes) the pistons on the 250 last most riders over a year and a 380 maybe 2 years-not much else to do-fork service once a year takes only about 1.5 hours.
A KTM or Honda 4 stroke should have a topend at 45hours just like the 2stokes and the oil is alot harder to change(4 stroke riders will say its not that hard -but its harder than the 2 stroke as is the top end.The 2 stoke top end will be cheaper as well-a vertex kit costs less than £80 here and they are std on the KTMs)
Another point is the KTM 250exc has almost the same power as a 250sx(50hp) which is more than a 400sx and almost as much as a 450.A 380 will have more than a 450 i should think.
I firmly believe a modern 2 stoke KTM 250/300/380 is the least maintence required bikes made including 4 strokes.Think about it, change the gearbox oil every 2 rides (takes 5 mins)change the airfilter every ride (takes 3 minutes) the pistons on the 250 last most riders over a year and a 380 maybe 2 years-not much else to do-fork service once a year takes only about 1.5 hours.
A KTM or Honda 4 stroke should have a topend at 45hours just like the 2stokes and the oil is alot harder to change(4 stroke riders will say its not that hard -but its harder than the 2 stroke as is the top end.The 2 stoke top end will be cheaper as well-a vertex kit costs less than £80 here and they are std on the KTMs)
Another point is the KTM 250exc has almost the same power as a 250sx(50hp) which is more than a 400sx and almost as much as a 450.A 380 will have more than a 450 i should think.
- Thread starter
- #12
You are exactly right, marcus. I have enjoyed this bike immensely once I got it set up the way I wanted it, but whenever I take a spin on my friends' newer bikes, they are all much better suspended, better handling, more powerful, and much lighter. I do fine on this bike, I can spank (no pun intended ;) ) most of my riding buddies in the woods, but I have to work a lot harder to do it. I can't help but wonder if I wouldn't be a much faster rider with a newer, more modern bike. I had decided on a KTM 200 or 250 MXC, but with the market beginning to lean heavily towards the development of four-strokes, and given my propensity to keep my bikes for a long time (yes, I know I'm a tightwad :) ), I wonder if it would not be a better long-term decision to make my next purchase a four-stroke. I have to agree with you on the maintenance issue. I do a top-end once a year on my bike, and it takes me about an hour from start to firing it up for break-in. I doubt that I could do a four-stroke top-end in an hour.
Last edited:
dheard4992
Member
- Feb 25, 2001
- 143
- 0
4-stroke
try a crf,they dont have the engine breaking.light like a 250 two stroke to.
try a crf,they dont have the engine breaking.light like a 250 two stroke to.
- Thread starter
- #14
Re: 4-stroke
There is no offroad version of the CRF yet, and I don't want to buy a $400 piston every 20 hours like the manual recommends. Yes, I know in all likelyhood I would get a lot more hours than that since I mainly trail ride, but I don't want to spend $500 everytime I need to do a top-end. Even if I double the factory reccomended interval to 40 hours, I would still be doing a top-end at least twice a year, and that's just too much money. I think the YZ-Fs/WRs and the RFSs get far more time from a top-end.
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Hey,
I've read some posts about the recommended times to put in new top ends on bikes. One post said something like 15 hrs. for the YZ/WR 250's. I think these values are definitely more for racing, and keeping the motor in it's absolute peak form all the time. I find it very hard to believe that you couldn't get a full year or maybe two on a CRF when ridden in trail situations, with good oil, changed frequently. Only time will tell, however. Furthermore, with the really flat piston in the CRF, it might be extra expensive to get a new one. Surely, in short order, aftermarket pistons will show up, and make it much more affordable than buying OEM.
I saw a CRF for the first time in my local Honda shop this weekend. I sat on her, and boy was she oh so sweet. I've never wanted racing type bikes, I'm a woods rider through and through, but I think even I would enjoy that CRF. Especially if they make an offroad version one day. Actually, I hope that they update the XR400 one day soon. I would love to see an XR4 in the form of the new XR650's. In the meantime, I'm still having a total blast with my ancient tech, XR400.
About your concern with the disappearance of 2-strokes in the future. I really wouldn't worry too much about it now. The earliest I've ever heard was like 2008. Even then, I think manufactures will just make them more environmentally friendly than to stop making them altogether. Get what you want. If that is a 2-stroke, then so be it.
What exactly are you displeased with on your KDX? From what I've heard they are nearly the perfect woods bike. With somewhat of a thumper-like power delivery, and reliability, with the light weight, good handling and power to weight ratio of 2-strokes. Maybe a new, high performance carb, or different header, or revalved suspension will refresh your bike?? Definitely alot cheaper than buying a new bike for almost $6000+. What exactly do you want from a new bike that your KDX doensn't offer??
I've read some posts about the recommended times to put in new top ends on bikes. One post said something like 15 hrs. for the YZ/WR 250's. I think these values are definitely more for racing, and keeping the motor in it's absolute peak form all the time. I find it very hard to believe that you couldn't get a full year or maybe two on a CRF when ridden in trail situations, with good oil, changed frequently. Only time will tell, however. Furthermore, with the really flat piston in the CRF, it might be extra expensive to get a new one. Surely, in short order, aftermarket pistons will show up, and make it much more affordable than buying OEM.
I saw a CRF for the first time in my local Honda shop this weekend. I sat on her, and boy was she oh so sweet. I've never wanted racing type bikes, I'm a woods rider through and through, but I think even I would enjoy that CRF. Especially if they make an offroad version one day. Actually, I hope that they update the XR400 one day soon. I would love to see an XR4 in the form of the new XR650's. In the meantime, I'm still having a total blast with my ancient tech, XR400.
About your concern with the disappearance of 2-strokes in the future. I really wouldn't worry too much about it now. The earliest I've ever heard was like 2008. Even then, I think manufactures will just make them more environmentally friendly than to stop making them altogether. Get what you want. If that is a 2-stroke, then so be it.
What exactly are you displeased with on your KDX? From what I've heard they are nearly the perfect woods bike. With somewhat of a thumper-like power delivery, and reliability, with the light weight, good handling and power to weight ratio of 2-strokes. Maybe a new, high performance carb, or different header, or revalved suspension will refresh your bike?? Definitely alot cheaper than buying a new bike for almost $6000+. What exactly do you want from a new bike that your KDX doensn't offer??
- Thread starter
- #16
I have a KDX 250, not a 200. The KDX 250 is a real porker, something that can't really be helped. The suspension isn't the greatest either, even after aftermarket work. I have done everything that can be done to the bike. Highly modded engine, suspension work, all the neccessary offroad addons, and the bike has served me well. It's just getting a little old, and to tell the truth, I just want a new bike. I'm tired of trying to toss that 260 lbs beast around.
Last edited:
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Hey,
I can't believe your KDX 250 weighs 260lbs. My XR4 has a dry weight of 257lbs. I would have thought your 2-stroke 250 would have been quite a bit lighter.
So you need a powerful, light, 4-stroke woods bike? At about 246lbs, a KTM 400 EX/C would probably be your best bet for a good performing bike out of the box. I can't afford one, and parts/service would be non-existant in my area, but maybe you would have better luck. I've also heard that Huskys and Husabergs make some light weight beasts, but I've never had any experience with the more exotic bikes.
I still like the idea of modding a CRF for woods use. With a little work, I think she would be a sweet woods bike.
What bikes are you leaning towards and why?
I can't believe your KDX 250 weighs 260lbs. My XR4 has a dry weight of 257lbs. I would have thought your 2-stroke 250 would have been quite a bit lighter.
So you need a powerful, light, 4-stroke woods bike? At about 246lbs, a KTM 400 EX/C would probably be your best bet for a good performing bike out of the box. I can't afford one, and parts/service would be non-existant in my area, but maybe you would have better luck. I've also heard that Huskys and Husabergs make some light weight beasts, but I've never had any experience with the more exotic bikes.
I still like the idea of modding a CRF for woods use. With a little work, I think she would be a sweet woods bike.
What bikes are you leaning towards and why?
- Thread starter
- #18
It weighs 247 lb. without gas. Add a full tank (3.5 gallons x 8 lbs.=28 lb.), and it jumps to 275 lb. Most of the weight is from a cheap, heavy fame material.
Originally, I wanted a KTM 200 or 250 MXC, but I am becoming curious about owning a four-stroke, I'm just not sure I will like one. The only one I have ridden that had the type and quantity of power that could make me switch is the YZ 400 F, but it wasn't any lighter than my bike, and that starting drill is a bunch of crap. I think Yamaha could have put an auto-decompressor on it, at least.
- Jul 3, 1999
- 2,726
- 1
I may get blasted but here it goes, get the 2 stroke you want and ride the grandfather clause into the future! 4 banges are worlds better then they were a few years ago but they are not quite there across the board yet... I believe they will be soon though. For now revel in the advances of the 2 stroke!
Kevin
Kevin
- Thread starter
- #20
Stange...I thought that if I asked this question in the thumper forum, I would be overwhelmed with reasons why I should get a four-stroke, but the only advice I have gotten is to get another two-stroke...maybe thumpers aren't that great after all?:think
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Hehe,
Actually thumpers are that great. It comes down to peak HP vs. usable HP. You either have alot of power at a small and specific RPM range or you have less power but through the whole RPM range. In the woods, especially the tight stuff, peaky bursts of power are virtually useless in all but the most experienced of hands. Less power over a greater range is much more versatile and the power is much better utilized. For example, you can use your 50HP maybe 30% of the time, but I can use my 30HP maybe 80% of the time. However, like the saying on Eric Gorr's website says "Speed is 90% rider, 5% bike...." It's all good, just personal preference.
Actually thumpers are that great. It comes down to peak HP vs. usable HP. You either have alot of power at a small and specific RPM range or you have less power but through the whole RPM range. In the woods, especially the tight stuff, peaky bursts of power are virtually useless in all but the most experienced of hands. Less power over a greater range is much more versatile and the power is much better utilized. For example, you can use your 50HP maybe 30% of the time, but I can use my 30HP maybe 80% of the time. However, like the saying on Eric Gorr's website says "Speed is 90% rider, 5% bike...." It's all good, just personal preference.
DRZ DOG 321
Member
- Dec 15, 2001
- 3
- 0
Hey Spanky,
I am new on this site, so I will try to be a good 4 stroke supporter. 260 lbs?
It all depends on how, where, and why you ride. Are you racing? Do you want to race? Play riding in the woods? Rat racing in the woods (you know some peoople just can't stand to get passed on the trail on the way back to the truck)? How about the local MX track?
Here's my view.....
Woods=XR400 Lasts forever, user friendly, neighbor friendly (I also used to bleed red.) Great easy ride on the trails without wearing you out. Tons of fun, and with some work and the right rider, very hard to beat.
Enduro/Harescrambles/Fast woods=KTM400 or Suzuki DRZ400 Probably won't last as long, either one will be competitive in the "B" class ("A"??harescrambles or enduro) in box-stock form. Both offer pretty good suspenders (almost MX-able for a lighter rider). Again, both are excellent trail bikes, but in my opinion, offer a better race package than the Honda. (Now I am bleeding yellow.)
Racing=YZ426F Hold on tight. Don't try to easy trail ride without first spending years in the gym bodybuilding. If you are lucky enough to spend most of your riding time in the wide open, the blue bike would most likely put the biggest grin on your face.
The others (I think they all start with "H") are not very common around here, so I can't comment on them. (I did ride a Husky some time back, but that is irrelavant).
I chose the DRZ400e for its multi-purpose appeal. It is certainlly not the fastest 400 4-stroke, but it is the easiest one "to go fast on" that I have ridden. The "magic" button is a hoot, the fit and finish is excellent (except for the tank graphics), and so far the reliability has been top notch. I ride mostly tight trails, try to do a couple of enduros and harescrambles a year, and like to visit the old style MX tracks. The price was right, the local Suzuki dealer is great............(More yellow blood.)
I think that the location and quality of your local bike dealerships should also be considered in the decision making process.
260 lbs? You will be hard pressed to find a 4 stroke woods bike that is much less than that. The Suzuki claims 249 lbs (electric start) but, mine weighs considerably more than that. Even the magazines say that the claimed weight that the Mfg's are printing is usually unrealistic. The KTM feels the lighest, but they all seem to loose the weight when you get on and twist the right grip. Fancy that.
My $.02
I am new on this site, so I will try to be a good 4 stroke supporter. 260 lbs?
It all depends on how, where, and why you ride. Are you racing? Do you want to race? Play riding in the woods? Rat racing in the woods (you know some peoople just can't stand to get passed on the trail on the way back to the truck)? How about the local MX track?
Here's my view.....
Woods=XR400 Lasts forever, user friendly, neighbor friendly (I also used to bleed red.) Great easy ride on the trails without wearing you out. Tons of fun, and with some work and the right rider, very hard to beat.
Enduro/Harescrambles/Fast woods=KTM400 or Suzuki DRZ400 Probably won't last as long, either one will be competitive in the "B" class ("A"??harescrambles or enduro) in box-stock form. Both offer pretty good suspenders (almost MX-able for a lighter rider). Again, both are excellent trail bikes, but in my opinion, offer a better race package than the Honda. (Now I am bleeding yellow.)
Racing=YZ426F Hold on tight. Don't try to easy trail ride without first spending years in the gym bodybuilding. If you are lucky enough to spend most of your riding time in the wide open, the blue bike would most likely put the biggest grin on your face.
The others (I think they all start with "H") are not very common around here, so I can't comment on them. (I did ride a Husky some time back, but that is irrelavant).
I chose the DRZ400e for its multi-purpose appeal. It is certainlly not the fastest 400 4-stroke, but it is the easiest one "to go fast on" that I have ridden. The "magic" button is a hoot, the fit and finish is excellent (except for the tank graphics), and so far the reliability has been top notch. I ride mostly tight trails, try to do a couple of enduros and harescrambles a year, and like to visit the old style MX tracks. The price was right, the local Suzuki dealer is great............(More yellow blood.)
I think that the location and quality of your local bike dealerships should also be considered in the decision making process.
260 lbs? You will be hard pressed to find a 4 stroke woods bike that is much less than that. The Suzuki claims 249 lbs (electric start) but, mine weighs considerably more than that. Even the magazines say that the claimed weight that the Mfg's are printing is usually unrealistic. The KTM feels the lighest, but they all seem to loose the weight when you get on and twist the right grip. Fancy that.
My $.02
- Mar 9, 2001
- 3,180
- 0
If you gear any bike correctly and know how to run threw those gears, It doesn't matter if it has 10 hp or 60 hp or even if it's a 2s or 4s you should be pushing the 100% mark. The only thing that's holding you back is your fitness and stamina, not the bike
snaggleXR4
Member
- Aug 5, 2001
- 309
- 0
Jpivey,
Good point on the gearing issue. I used to ride an '87 XR200 that wouldn't pull me through the sand at all. After lowering the gearing a bit, I could easily pull through all the gears. A good friend of mine on an RM125 was having problems on the trail also, after gearing down, he blasts around much easier now. It's amazing what a little change to your gearing can do. On the contrary, my XR400 still has the stock 15/45 gearing, which is more like street gearing, but with the grunty engine and low peak RPM's the stock gearing strangely seems to do quite well even in the real tight stuff. If I rode real tight stuff all the time though, I would definitely gear down a notch or two.
Maybe my analogy was bad, and certainly not an accurate one. However, I think it demonstrates why the "lazy" power delivery of woods type thumpers can actually be more effective in a tight trail situation when compared to a real peaky powerband common with 2-stroke MX bikes. I trying my darndest to bring Spanky over to the "Darkside."
Good point on the gearing issue. I used to ride an '87 XR200 that wouldn't pull me through the sand at all. After lowering the gearing a bit, I could easily pull through all the gears. A good friend of mine on an RM125 was having problems on the trail also, after gearing down, he blasts around much easier now. It's amazing what a little change to your gearing can do. On the contrary, my XR400 still has the stock 15/45 gearing, which is more like street gearing, but with the grunty engine and low peak RPM's the stock gearing strangely seems to do quite well even in the real tight stuff. If I rode real tight stuff all the time though, I would definitely gear down a notch or two.
Maybe my analogy was bad, and certainly not an accurate one. However, I think it demonstrates why the "lazy" power delivery of woods type thumpers can actually be more effective in a tight trail situation when compared to a real peaky powerband common with 2-stroke MX bikes. I trying my darndest to bring Spanky over to the "Darkside."
